Boise Cascade site housing plan is dead

Sep. 11, 2013

Front Street in the foreground. Brian Moore is director of real estate development for Mountain West Investment Corporation, whose office building overlooks the old Boise Cascade property that Mountain West is wanting to transform into housing and other development. / Thomas Patterson / Statesman Journal

Written by

and Peter Wong

Timeline

2005: Salem and Boise Cascade begin discussing the possibility of relocating the company’s operations from the downtown location to another site in the city. Officials begin to talk about redeveloping the riverfront parcels. 2006: A panel of national experts unveils a sweeping proposal to redevelop Boise Cascade’s 13-acre riverfront property. They envision the company relocating its remaining riverfront operations to another location in Salem and marketing its waterfront property for development of condominiums, shops, restaurants and parking. 2007: In January, Boise Cascade LLC tells more than 100 workers at the downtown paper-converting plant that their jobs are ending within nine months. The plant begins to phase out operations and closes. 2007: Developers Dan Berrey and Larry Tokarski purchase the Boise Cascade 13-acre site for $7.25 million. Years later, Berrey leaves the project. 2007: City leaders create the South Waterfront Urban Renewal area. It’s intended to jump-start redevelopment of Boise Cascade’s downtown site. 2007: Officials admit that the train tracks that cut across the Boise site could be an obstacle for redevelopment. State transportation officials and the railroad are adamant: no public at-grade crossings will be allowed because of safety and liability issues. 2008: Developers unveil plans for the Boise site at an open house. Plans included converting the warehouse on the south block into a parking garage with as many as 550 spaces, 80 townhouse-style apartments, and a full-service gymnasium with a swimming pool. 2009: Demolition of old buildings begins at the Boise site, starting with a structure known as the “triangle building.” 2010: The sputtering economy stalls the redevelopment. Developers had hoped to start remodeling the south warehouse building for new tenants, including a health club, by spring. About $16 million to $18 million worth of improvements had been proposed for the structure. 2011: Work crews remove a 50-foot swath of concrete to expose a portion of Pringle Creek that had been hidden for decades. 2012: Developers reveal plans to build a 120-unit apartment complex along Salem’s waterfront. 2013: The latest proposal for the vacant Boise Cascade site is a $13 million medical rehabilitation facility. Marquis Companies wants to build a 38,000-square-foot acute rehab center on a portion of the site. 2013: Salem City Council considers the developer’s requests for traffic and fire protection easement across Riverfront Park. The park is next to the site where the developer wants to build the Residences at Riverfront Park apartment complex. Tuesday: Mountain West Investment Corp. informs city of Salem officials that the $17 million apartment project has been called off.

More

ADVERTISEMENT

For more than six years, the former Boise Cascade site has generated hopes that downtown Salem could enjoy a slice of Portland Pearl District-style redevelopment.

On Tuesday, the latest proposal for the vacant property was withdrawn after it became a lightening rod for controversy.

The site’s owner, Mountain West Investment Corp., told city officials that it no longer was pursuing plans to build a 118-unit apartment complex on a riverfront portion of the Boise Cascade side.

It’s unclear what the decision means for other parts of the Boise Cascade property. Mountain West Investment officials were not available late Tuesday.

Those portions include the so-called North Block, where a rehabilitation center had been proposed; the South Block, where the main Boise Cascade building still stands; and the Slough Parcel, where artist renderings had shown mainly landscaping.

In a prepared statement, however, Brian Moore, director of real estate development for Mountain West Investment, said “it has become clear that the outcomes necessary for the delivery of the Residences at Riverfront Park (apartments) are distant and uncertain.”

The uncertainty about the project was driven, in part, “by the lack of clarity and consensus in the public approval process,” Moore said.

The future of the Boise Cascade site has been considered for years.

Experts with the Urban Land Institute published a report in 2006 suggesting that the property could be transformed into a showcase mixed-use development, including a hotel, a specialty grocery store and more than 200 condominiums.

In 2007, Mountain West Investment Corp. took control of the property. From the start, the development group struggled to overcome the site’s key problem: access. Railroad tracks divide the property, and state transportation officials have been unwilling to add a new at-grade crossing or crossings.

To launch the property’s redevelopment, Mountain West Investment officials recently had asked the city to approve traffic and fire protection easements through Riverfront Park. The park is next to land where the developer hoped to build the $17 million apartment complex.

But the plan to provide easements across public park land drew fire from some Salem residents, who were concerned it would harm Riverfront Park’s amenities, such as Salem’s Riverfront Carousel.

“When you try to build a road through a park in front of an asset such as the carousel, you’re going to draw strong opposition,” Salem City Councilor Chuck Bennett said.

“I feel a sense of relief, but we did not want this to be a divisive issue,” said Hazel Patton, one of the original organizers of the carousel. “I have friends who were promoting the project.”

At Monday’s Salem City Council meeting, councilors produced a list of questions for staffers to answer about the request for easements. No vote was taken. Instead, councilors decided to leave the record open for written testimony and continue the hearing Oct. 14.

The access plan would have used an existing State Street railroad crossing and route traffic past the Salem’s Riverfront Carousel parking area.

Because federal funds were used to develop Minto Brown Island Park and a portion of Riverfront Park, a federal review would have been required before the easements were granted.

In recent weeks, city officials have learned the federal process could include a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review, a 30-day public comment period and appeals.

Mountain West Investment officials said the likelihood of a two-year federal review played into their decision to back away from the apartment development.

Salem City Councilor Diana Dickey said she was surprised by the developer’s abrupt decision to drop the project. Dickey added that she could understand why the developer was hesitant to deal with a complex and lengthy review.

The city took 500 emails from Salem residents, most of whom opposed the project, said Salem City Councilor Brad Nanke. In the view of the federal government, the controversy changed the easement requests from a minor issue to a major one, he said.

You will automatically receive the StatesmanJournal.com Top 5 daily email newsletter. If you don't want to receive this newsletter, you can change your newsletter selections in your account preferences.